Thesis: Perhaps one of the most debated issues in history, the death penalty is very often disputed. An even more disputed issue, though, in today's society is capital punishment for teens. Should teens who commit felonies while they are minors be tried as adults or should the punishment fit the crime? Many feel that the punishment should fit the crime, although capital punishment is said to violate the Constitution, as cruel and unusual punishment.
I Introduction
II REPLACE the death penalty with a life sentence without parole. If the death penalty was replaced with a life sentence without parole, it might not be so questionable in terms of morals and punishment.
New Mexico banned capital punishment in 2009 and replaced it with life without parole for felons, except two people who are already on death row. These two will not be affected by this new law and will be executed as planned. This will be New Mexico's last executions.
Even if most states did replace the death sentence in some way, would it still be considered as cruel and unusual punishment for teens who commit crimes and are charged with life without parole? It should depend on how close they are to being eighteen. For example, if a felon was thirteen, he/she should not be tried as an adult because he/ she is still learning the difference between right and wrong and should be tried as a juvenile offender.
III Many people argue that the death sentence is unconstitutional and should be banned everywhere. This arguement first came about in the court case Roper v. Sullivan. The defendant was a seventeen year old at the time he committed the crime.The question was whether or not to try him as a minor or as an adult. The defendant was not charged with the death penalty because of its questionable unconstitutionality; in corresponse, it violates the fourteenth and eight amendments of the Constitution.
"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;": means that every US citizen has the same rights, and no state can change that. (from the fourteenth amendment)
"...nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." Some view the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment, but some murderers torture their victims before death. If that is true, then why can't a murderer suffer the same amount before death? The victim of the Roper v. Sullivan case was bound and gagged, robbed, and then thrown into a river and drowned. All by a seventeen-year-old, who should have known the difference between right and wrong. Such 'cruel and unusual' treatment should not be tolerated. The punishment for crimes such as this should be tailored to make the perpetrator suffer the same fate as the victim.
IV Today's society simply doe not have enough fear. We do not fear the death penalty as much as some think we should. We teach our children that about fair treatment, but shouldn't we be teaching them about fair punishment, too? We should teach them that there are repercussions for our actions. For their actions. Maybe if children and teens feared punishment, not to mention public humiliation, there would not be such an unbelieveable amount of juvenile crime.
A thirteen-year old was sentenced life without parole, and some claimed it was in contension with the eighth amendment, but life without parole is better than lethal injection. At least the child will grow up and die of natural causes. Yes, his childhood will be far from normal, but how many preteens commit murder? These days, too many.
Would a fear of the death penalty deter criminals? In theory, it sounds good, but today there are so many nihilists that they may not even care.
I Introduction